NY Regents Propose Teacher-Licensing Board

New York--The New York State Board of Regents has endorsed a number
of legislative proposals aimed at improving the quality and performance
of teachers in the state.

The 16-member policy-making board meeting here also proposed that
the state increase its aid to elementary and secondary schools by
$524.9 million (or 13 percent) for the 1982-83 school year. Much of
that money would be directed to poorer school districts in the state
under a new and controversial school-finance formula that was also
endorsed by the regents.

For the third consecutive year, the regents have decided to resubmit
to the State Legislature a series of bills designed to establish
teaching as a state-recognized profession. The bills would:

Define the practice of teaching, provide for a State Board of
Teaching (which would serve as a licensing body), define unprofessional
conduct in teaching, and establish professional discipline procedures
and penalties.

Appropriate state funds for the establishment of internships for
newly employed teachers and administrators in public schools.

Provide funding for the development of state tests for certification
of teachers and administrators, for in-service education of
public-school teachers and administrators, and for state monitoring of
local school district reviews of teacher and administrator
performance.

Elevating teaching to the status of a legally recognized profession,
says State Commissioner of Education Gordon M. Ambach, "has a direct
payoff in terms of heightened recognition for teachers. It would allow
us to attract new and higher-quality candidates into teaching in the
state."

However, the proposal has drawn stiff opposition from both the
state's major teachers' union and its school boards' association. And
the idea has failed to attract many supporters in the legislature,
which rejected similar legislation in each of its last two
sessions.

Opposition to Licensing Board

New York State United Teachers, which represents nearly 90 percent
of the classroom teachers in the state, and the New York State School
Boards Association both object to the creation of a licensing board,
but for opposing reasons.

The teachers' group refuses to endorse the board without assurances
that it will be controlled by practicing teachers. The school boards
association, asserting that teachers are public employees, wants
assurances that the board will not be dominated by teachers. The
question of the composition of the board has not been resolved, state
education department officials say.

A teachers' union official also cited the cost of the
"teaching-as-a-profession" legislation--estimated by the state
education department at $33 million in the first full year--as a reason
for his organization's opposition to it.

Regarding the $524.9-million increase in state education aid
proposed by the regents, Mr. Ambach said the sum is needed to achieve
the board's goals of increasing the state's share of total
public-school expenditures, reducing the disparity between the amount
of money spent on public education in school districts in the state,
and easing pressure on local property taxes.

The proposed increase would bring the total state aid budget to just
over $4.5 billion in the 1982-83 school year, and would raise the state
share of public education financing from 39 percent to 40 percent. In
1970, the state's share was 50 percent, according to the regents' vice
chancellor, J. Edward Meyer.

Under the new financing plan adopted by the regents, 191 districts
would lose $48 million, and 488 districts would get an additional $550
million in state aid, according to state education department
figures.

Some districts would lose state money, Mr. Ambach said, because the
board's new plan would phase out, over a four-year period, the state's
so-called "flat grant" and "save harmless" provisions. These now
prevent the awarding of less state education aid to any district than
it received the previous year, regardless of shifts in enrollment.

This proposal to equalize district-by-district expenditures by
reducing state aid to wealthydistricts has drawn sharp criticism from
some quarters.

Mr. Meyer said it is unfair to place districts in a position of
having to increase taxes to maintain present standards. He was one of
two regents who voted against the financing plan approved by the
board.

James V. Vetro, assistant executive director of the state school
boards association, said his organization is opposed to the so-called
"leveling-down" formula and will lobby against the abolition of the two
provisions.

Raising Spending Levels

Assemblyman Leonard P. Stavisky, chairman of the State Assembly
Education Committee, said that he will support the regents' proposal
for a 13-percent increase in state education aid, but he added that he
would prefer a plan that would not reduce aid to any districts, but
rather would seek to bring spending levels in poorer districts up to
those in wealthier ones.

Regent Meyer said this "leveling up" method of equalizing school
expenditure, if accomplished through state aid, would cost the state $1
billion a year.

Mr. Stavisky predicted that the regents proposed aid increases and
"leveling down" distribution formula will face strong opposition in the
state legislature next year.

Constitution Violated

Last month, the Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme
Court in Brookyln declared that the current system of financing public
schools, which relies to a great extent on local property taxes,
violated the State Constitution by discriminating against districts
with low property values.

The regents also recommended that state aid be based half on pupil
attendance and half on enrollment, instead of solely on the basis of
attendance, as is now the case. Commissioner Ambach said that such a
move would be more equitable to large cities in the state, where
attendance is lower. Assemblyman Stavisky said he supports this
proposal.

Among other recommendations being forwarded by the regents to Gov.
Hugh L. Carey and the legislature are several bills designed to counter
what state education officials describe as a "severe" shortage of
science and mathematics teachers.

Teacher Scholarships

These measures include the establishment of state-funded,
com-petitive undergraduate and graduate scholarships for prospective
teachers of elementary and secondary mathematics and science, and the
creation of mathematics- and science-teaching "consultantships" in
school districts throughout the state.

(These consultants would be selected by the state education
department from among the practicing mathematics and science teachers
in the state, and would develop new programs, offer in-service
training, and improve curricula in school districts throughout the
state.)

Danger of Severe Shortages

The cost of these two programs is estimated by state education
officials to be $1 million.

Addressing the need for legislation to recruit science and
mathematics teachers, Mr. Ambach said, "Competition from business and
industry is so severe, and salary levels in the private sector are so
attractive that we are in great danger of having severe shortages."

Vol. 01, Issue 13

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.